Seek Yahweh:

A Hebrew Gospel of Matthew

by Rev. John Cortright

No early Hebrew translations of the New Testament are

known. If such manuscripts did exist, we would have
tremendous enlightenment regarding the name of God
in New Testament times. Although no such manuscripts
exist, writings of early church fathers indicate that the
Gospel of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew.1

Papias (130 AD)

“Matthew wrote the oracles in the Hebrew
language, and every one interpreted them as he
was able” (Eusebius, Church History, 3.39.16)

Irenaeus of Lyons (170 AD)

“Matthew also issued a written Gospel among
the Hebrews in their own dialect.” (Irenaeus,
Against Heresies, 3.1.1)

Origen (200 AD)

“The first was written by Matthew, who was
once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of
Jesus Christ, and it was prepared for the
converts from Judaism, and published in the
Hebrew language.” (Eusebius, Church History,
6.25.4)

Eusebius (315 AD)

“For Matthew, who had at first preached to the
Hebrews, when he was about to go to other
 peoples, committed his Gospel to writing in his
native tongue.” (Eusebius, Church History, 3.24)

Jerome (382 AD)

“Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and
aforetimes publican, composed a Gospel of
Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrew for
the sake of those of the circumcision who
believed, but this was afterwards translated
into Greek, though by what author is uncertain.
The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the
present day in the library at Caesarea.” (Jerome,
On Illustrious Men, 3)

No copies of this Hebrew version of Matthew exist. The

Greek language “had an enormous impact in Judea in
both Second Temple and rabbinic times. As far as we
know, however, Hebrew remained the primary
language of literary expression. The Qumran scrolls
demonstrate that Hebrew was the original language of
most of the works written in Judea between the period
of the Maccabees and the destruction of the temple in
70 CD.”2 For years, it had been commonly believed that
Hebrew was not spoken in Jesus’ day and that the
vernacular of Palestine was Aramaic. However, since
the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, scholars have
reconsidered this supposition as these texts are
overwhelmingly Hebrew, not Aramaic. Many other
discoveries from Judea in the last 50 years have also
confirmed the extensive use of Hebrew in the land of
Judea in the early first century.

The New Testament bears witness to this truth as well.

Some have thought the following uses of the word
“Hebrew” should be understood as “Aramaic.”
However, there is a very good possibility that the
Scriptures mean exactly what they say and that the
language was indeed Hebrew.

John 20:16
Jesus said to her, "Mary!" She turned and said
to Him in Hebrew, "Rabboni!" (which means
Teacher).

John 19:20
Therefore many of the Jews read this
inscription, for the place where Jesus was
crucified was near the city; and it was written in
Hebrew, Latin and in Greek.

Acts 21:40; 22:2

When he had given him permission, Paul,
standing on the stairs, motioned to the people
with his hand; and when there was a great
hush, he spoke to them in the Hebrew dialect,
saying,
And when they heard that he was addressing
them in the Hebrew dialect, they became even
more quiet; and he said,

Acts 26:14
And when we had all fallen to the ground, I
heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew
dialect, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting
Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.'
If this is the case, then it seems altogether reasonable
to believe that some of the New Testament writings,
especially those written to Jews living in Israel, would
have been written in Hebrew. Although there are no
known early Hebrew New Testament manuscripts, a
complete Hebrew Text of Matthew was produced in the
fourteenth century by a Jew named Shem-Tob. This
copy of Matthew is part of a larger Hebrew writing
known as Even Bohan or “The Touchstone.” Shem-Tob
made this translation, not to support Christianity, but as
Jew he wrote this as a polemic, written to refute
Christianity. The original document contained many
polemical insertions used by Shem-Tob as arguments to
support Judaism against the Christian doctrine. What
text did Shem-Tob use to make this Hebrew translation?
George Howard’s excellent analysis provides strong
evidence that this translation did not come from an
existing Greek text, but more likely was a translation of
an earlier Hebrew manuscript.3

One particular note of interest is in Howard’s appendix

on “The Divine Name” and Shem-Tob’s use of the
Hebrew letter “h” (Heth), which is a shortened form of
“msh” (HaShem or “The Name”). The term “HaShem”
is one of the common surrogates spoken by Jews today
when reading the name of God. This use of the Hebrew
letter “h” appears 19 times in Shem Tob’s translation –
(Mt 1:22, 24; 2:13, 19; 3:3; 4:7, 10; 5:33; 15:8; 21:9, 12,
42; 22:31, 32, 37, 44; 27:9; 28:2, 9). An examination of
the majority of these references reveals that this is
often a quote from the Old Testament and is clearly a
reference to Yahweh. The Greek texts use the word
“kurios;” the Syriac versions use the word “myra;” Latin
is “domino;” and in English, it is translated as “Lord.”
However, in three instances there is no corresponding
Greek, Syriac, Latin, or English equivalent. “The Name”
simply appears in Shem-Tob’s Hebrew version. The
three references are as follows:
Matthew 15:8 – “Thus h [HaShem] said,
because this people…,”
Matthew 22:32 –“I h [HaShem], am the God of
Abraham…,
Matthew 28:9 – “Jesus passed before them
saying: May h [HaShem] deliver you, then they
came near to him, bowed down…”
This begs the question, “Why would Shem-Tob, a Jew
of the strictest sense, add a usage of Hashem,
representing the sacred Name, to a text where it did not
exist in the first place?” Howard states, “The conclusion
that seems inescapable is that Shem-Tob found the
Divine Name already in his gospel text, having received
it from an earlier generation of Jewish tradents. He
permitted the Divine Name to remain in the text
perhaps because he was unsure himself about what to
do with it.”4 By the 14th century, Jewish tradition had
completely restricted the use of the name of God.
Shem-Tob, being a fervent Jew, would not have added
“the Name” to a Christian manuscript. He would,
however, have been careful not to write the name and
instead use the common Jewish surrogate, msh
(HaShem) or in shortened form “h.”

Perhaps one day, more discoveries will be found that

would provide insight into the use of Hebrew in New
Testament writings. If that were the case, then the
name, Yahweh, could be seen in the texts and not the
ambiguous title “Lord.” When reading the words of
Jesus speaking about his Father in the Hebrew tongue,
we would see him boldly declare God’s name in the
Shema, the Jewish statement of faith:

Matthew 22:36-38
Rabbi, tell us which is the greatest
commandment in the Torah.
He said to him: Thou shalt love Yahweh your
God with all your heart and with all your soul
and with all your strength. This is the first.

(This is a rendering of George Howard’s

translation of Shem Tob’s Hebrew Gospel of
Matthew, replacing the Hebrew letter “h” with
the name of God, Yahweh, –rather than the
ambiguous surrogate “Lord” or the Jewish
substitute “HaShem.”)

1
All Church Father quotes are translated by Ernest Cushing
Richardson. From Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second
Series, Vol. 3. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace.
(Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co. 1892.)
Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.
<http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2708.htm>.
Downloaded on 2/22/2013
2
Shaye J.D. Cohen, From the Maccabees to the Mishnah
(Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, KY, Copyright ©
2005) Page 32
3
George Howard, Hebrew Gospel of Matthew (Mercer
University Press, Macon Georgia, Copyright © 1995), Part
Two, Analysis and Commentary, Pg 153-234
4
Ibid., pg 231